Nelson and Jellicoe

[Theletterwriter]

I think the whole thread has been about disrespect to men who did the best they could with the ships and information they had.

MikB

I am in complete agreement with you. I would just add to the end of your last sentence "...on 31 May and 1 June 1916".

Douglas

[Gary Charles]

I am also in complete Agreement with you Doug. There is no disrespect intended by me towards the brave sailors who sailed on May 31 almost 100 years ago, I have nothing but respect for them, and some of my Grand parents numbered among them. Those that I have no respect for are the spin doctors who subsequently wrote lies and misinformation after the war to validate their own agendas. These people showed great disrespect to the men afloat who risked and gave their lives by twisting and lying about the facts to promote their own propaganda and post war agendas. They even created a rift between Jellicoe and Beatty and it should be questioned whether such ill will ever existed between the two men. Some men mentioned on this thread were obviously in positions that they were unsuited to, but they are not disrespected.

[mmar]

Jellicoe was a baffoon. Mediocrity does not equal greatness, yes he made no serious errors, but he did nothing spectacular either. He was a mediocre military mind, with little imagination, to even contemplate comparing him with someone like Nelson is absurd. Even worse a post in this thread suggest comparing Wellington with Montgormery . Montgomery cut from the same cloth as Jellicoe. The 'must not make mistakes' philosophy opitimised by officers like Jellicoe is what hindered the British military thinking from the Crimean war to the end of the second world war

[MikB]

Even worse a post in this thread suggest comparing Wellington with Montgormery .

You really didn't even read the post, did you?

[mmar]

You really didn't even read the post, did you?

Montgomery and Wellington shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence in my opinion

Victory

What would you have done if you were in Jellicoe's shoes to ensure the absolute and total defeat of the German Fleet during the Battle of Jutland?

Douglas

Had Jellicoe defeated the German fleet decisively, the German war effort may have collapsed sooner, thereby saving thousands of lives. Also the disastrous Battle of Passchendaele may never have taken place had the German fleet been properly beaten, because the threat to the coastal ports would not have existed. Jellicoe should have taken the chance to anihilate the German fleet at Jutland, his grounds for caution were baseless, he had overwhelming firepower at his disposal, there was absolutely no chance the Grand fleet would have taken crippling loses, he could have put the entire German surface fleet to the bottom of the sea. Its not a case of hindsight, anyone with half a brain knew the importance of destroying the German fleet. The idea that Jellicoe was successful because he kept the British fleet intact is spin, the British grand fleet was enormous, it could have sustained three times the amount of losses and still keep the Germans under blockade.

[Andrew Hesketh]

Making a judgement about people and events based on 'what may have happened if'is an often interesting, though ultimately pointless thing to do. It certainly can't be submitted as an argument in debate. And it's hard to debate with someone who clearly isn't open to the concept: as MikB said, you haven't read, or understood a previous post.

[mmar]

Making a judgement about people and events based on 'what may have happened if'is an often interesting, though ultimately pointless thing to do. It certainly can't be submitted as an argument in debate. And it's hard to debate with someone who clearly isn't open to the concept: as MikB said, you haven't read, or understood a previous post.

As I said in my post, its not a debate about hindsight, it was clearly understood at the time: the German fleet had to be defeated decisively, which is why Beatty drew them out into open engagement, and why there was such contemporary dissapointment at Jellicoe's failure. The fact is Jellicoe was axxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Edited 6 August , 2013 by Keith Roberts
Pointlessly offensive language.

[Andrew Hesketh]

Thank you for proving my point with your last sentence. As there is nothing to see here, I'll move on.

[Steven Broomfield]

Wise move, Mr Hesketh. Mmar might not have been on the Forum but has proved to be a person of robust views.

[keithfazzani]

As I said in my post, its not a debate about hindsight, it was clearly understood at the time: the German fleet had to be defeated decisively, which is why Beatty drew them out into open engagement, and why there was such contemporary dissapointment at Jellicoe's failure. The fact is Jellicoe was axxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

It seems sad that the Internet is increasingly being used as a medium of insult. Debate is healthy, flinging insults is not debate, it is simply rude. To insult the dead by calling them names has no place in adult debate. I for one am disappointed that this is happening on this forum, although disgusted may be a better word.

[Andrew Hesketh]

You know what, I actually generally agree with your points, but the way you make them is just embarrassingly bad. This forum is a brilliant place for discussion and debate, but you leave no room for any of that and, as a result, we will collectively learn zip from this thread.

[MikB]

Montgomery and Wellington shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence in my opinion

That might be a legitimate point to debate, but not in this topic, not on this forum, and not in your style.

[keithmroberts]

Final call.

No more personalities, no more unsuitable phraseology, or off topic interventions.

There will be no further requests on this thread for civilised conduct.

Keith Roberts

[TeeCeeCee]

As I said in my post, its not a debate about hindsight, it was clearly understood at the time: the German fleet had to be defeated decisively, which is why Beatty drew them out into open engagement, and why there was such contemporary dissapointment at Jellicoe's failure. The fact is Jellicoe was axxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm not taking sides in this, I can't think of where Beatty, or Jellicoe for that matter, did this?

From my (admittedly hazy) understanding of the WW1 sea war in the North Sea, it was always the RN who reacted to the HSF or KM. The only time I can recall that the RN inspired or caused the KM to come out was Heligoland Bight when the big ships sought to protect the smaller units.

[hazelclark]

I'm not taking sides in this, I can't think of where Beatty, or Jellicoe for that matter, did this?

From my (admittedly hazy) understanding of the WW1 sea war in the North Sea, it was always the RN who reacted to the HSF or KM. The only time I can recall that the RN inspired or caused the KM to come out was Heligoland Bight when the big ships sought to protect the smaller units.

You are quite correct if it is what became the Battle of Jutland is being discussed. Scheer had been making forays out with his whole Fleet in the hope of engaging and destroying the British. However,the British, thanks to intelligence, knew on this occasion that they were coming, and Jellicoe sailed from Scapa and Beatty from Rosyth. Because of an error in information about timing, Beatty ended up too far in advance of Jellicoe (who was steaming slowly to conserve fuel) and unexpectedly ran, first into Hipper's fleet and then Scheer. He ultimately lured Scheer off into an equally unexpected meeting with Jellicoe which ultimately became the Battle of Jutland. Scheer tried a couple of times to avoid Jellicoe who, although he did not closely pursue him, nevertheless managed to get himself between Scheer and his home ports and was able to broadside him.

Hazel

[Theletterwriter]

Montgomery and Wellington shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence in my opinion

Had Jellicoe defeated the German fleet decisively, the German war effort may have collapsed sooner, thereby saving thousands of lives. Also the disastrous Battle of Passchendaele may never have taken place had the German fleet been properly beaten, because the threat to the coastal ports would not have existed. Jellicoe should have taken the chance to anihilate the German fleet at Jutland, his grounds for caution were baseless, he had overwhelming firepower at his disposal, there was absolutely no chance the Grand fleet would have taken crippling loses, he could have put the entire German surface fleet to the bottom of the sea. Its not a case of hindsight, anyone with half a brain knew the importance of destroying the German fleet. The idea that Jellicoe was successful because he kept the British fleet intact is spin, the British grand fleet was enormous, it could have sustained three times the amount of losses and still keep the Germans under blockade.

mmar

I have been following your posts on my phone during a recent business trip but thought it better to leave my reply until I arrived home to my desktop. Your statement that his (Jellicoe’s) grounds for caution were baseless is one rooted in hindsight. It is easy for any of us in 2013 to postulate what Jellicoe should have done, not at all easy for Jellicoe at the time. How could Jellicoe know there was absolutely no chance the Grand Fleet would have taken crippling losses?

We also have to understand that radio communications were still in their infancy. I have only found out recently that messages were sometimes relayed through a third ship rather than directly ship to ship. I assume that distance between individual ships was a factor. It would appear that poor or unclear communications from the Admiralty and men under his command such as Beatty, Goodenough and Evan-Thomas did not allow Jellicoe to confirm the exact position of the High Sea Fleet early enough in the Battle. This is not an excuse but is a possible contributory factor in how events at Jutland unfolded.

Rash or ill informed decisions can be costly no matter what course we take in life. It would have been a ludicrous decision for Jellicoe to position the Grand Fleet in such a way that would have had potentially serious consequences for his men and his ships without knowing the exact position in which the HFS were sailing. Whether he could have positioned the Grand Fleet in a totally advantageous position, once the location of the HFS was clarified during the mid to late evening of 31 May is something no one can confirm with 100% certainty in 2013. I believe, we can only speculate.

In my opinion, it is a flippant remark to say that the Grand Fleet could have sustained three times the amount of losses and keep the blockade. That is open to conjecture but I suspect the families of all Grand Fleet personnel who did survive Jutland were more than happy to have their men come back home. In war, losses are to be expected but not lives which are needlessly thrown away. You may not have been so willing to accept higher losses if you were in the stokehold of one of the ships of the Royal Navy at Jutland.

I joined the forum, in part, to find out more about the Battle of Jutland. I have read a number of books on the subject to try and understand how my great grandfather was lost on the Indefatigable. Today, I am still learning and open to reading and taking part in reasoned debates. Childish name calling demeans any argument or stance.

Castigating Jellicoe for what, in your mind, he did or did not do is a simple task. Therefore, I pose the same question as I posed to Victory “What would you have done if you were in Jellicoe's shoes to ensure the absolute and total defeat of the German Fleet during the Battle of Jutland”?

Douglas

[MikB]

mmar

Your statement that his (Jellicoe’s) grounds for caution were baseless is one rooted in hindsight. Douglas

I think you're too generous, Douglas. Even limited study of the events of the battle establishes that Marlborough was hit by one torpedo, and she and several other major ships in Jellicoe's line had to carry out startling manoeuvres to evade others, and this with only a fraction of the number of kippers in the water that any GF commander could suspect. With or without hindsight it's clear he had good reason to believe in substantial risk. Regards, MikB

[Theletterwriter]

MikB

Point taken.

Douglas

[ATM]

Wow...Boy has this thread gone downhill. One of the reasons I stopped posting on here was because of the aggressive tone but it has got even worse.

MikB and Douglas, I agree with you both. Almost all of the criticisms on here come from hindsight. I should also add the sheer ignorance of some of the posts.

As for Motgomery. Try reading some of the serious studies on Montgomery, not the near libellous popular history's like Correlli Barnett's the Desert Generals or pretty much anything by Stephen Ambrose. Have a look at Colossal Cracks, Raising Churchill's Army, Pendulum of War the three battles of Alamein, British Armour in Normandy, The Battle For Normandy 1944 and The Battle for the Rhine 1944-45.

Alas Montgomery's distinctly unpleasant has affected objective appraisals of him as a general.

[MikB]

Alas Montgomery's distinctly unpleasant has affected objective appraisals of him as a general.

I wasn't slagging Monty, and there are some unattractive episodes in Wellington's career. Both delivered significant victories, but my point was that, as with Nelson and Jellicoe, it's impossible to make valid comparison between them because of the enormous difference in the technical, tactical and strategic circumstances.

Even if it were, this isn't the forum for it.

Regards,

MikB

[ATM]

My comment on Monty was directed to mmar as he was having a pop. You are right it is for another forum but I felt the need to at least point critics in the right direction.

[Steven Broomfield]

My comment on Monty was directed to mmar as he was having a pop.

I wouldn't waste your breath on that one. He/she isn't interested in debate so I wouldn't be worrying too much.

[bill24chev]

mmar

Rash or ill informed decisions can be costly no matter what course we take in life. It would have been a ludicrous decision for Jellicoe to position the Grand Fleet in such a way that would have had potentially serious consequences for his men and his ships without knowing the exact position in which the HFS were sailing. Whether he could have positioned the Grand Fleet in a totally advantageous position, once the location of the HFS was clarified during the mid to late evening of 31 May is something no one can confirm with 100% certainty in 2013. I believe, we can only speculate.

Douglas

I agree with most of your post but Jellicoe did position the Grand Fleet for an almost Perfect crossing of Sheer's T.

The highly regarded WW2 Admiral Cunningham (C-in-C Med. fleet ) said something along the lines of "If I had got my fleet in the same postilion as Jellicoe did I would be very happy"

It would have helped Jellicoe if information available to the Commanders in the BC force and the Admiralty had given him the information on the the location of the HSF . If he had engaged perhaps an half hour earlier the Destruction of, or at least crippling damage to the HSF may have been a possibility.

Jutland for me can be compared to a Cricket Test Match with Both teams having some good and some bad moments in the first three innings but the team batting last, in this case the HSF just holding out to stumps on the last day to claim a Draw.

bill

[rumplestiltskin]

Having read this thread, all I can say is thanks, it has sparked an interest to learn more on this subject.

Regards Terry

[Steven Broomfield]

Actually, I agree with Terry - I would like to learn more.

Could I be cheeky and ask those much more knowledgeable than me (that's pretty well anyone, then) if they could recommend any good starter titles?